The Vatican Information Service is a news service, founded in the Holy See Press Office, that provides information about the Magisterium and the pastoral activities of the Holy Father and the Roman Curia...[+]

Last 5 news

Thursday, June 18, 2015

Vatican City, 18 June 2015 (VIS) –
The following text offers an overview of the 191 pages of the
Encyclical Laudato si' and its key points, along with a summary of
each of its six chapters (“What is happening to our common home”,
“The Gospel of Creation”, “The human roots of the ecological
crisis”, “Integral ecology”, “Lines of approach and action”,
and “Ecological education and spirituality”). The Encyclical
concludes with an interreligious prayer for our earth and a Christian
prayer for Creation.

“What kind of world do we want to
leave to those who come after us, to children who are now growing
up?” (160). This question is at the heart of Laudato si’ (May You
be praised), the anticipated Encyclical on the care of the common
home by Pope Francis. “This question does not have to do with the
environment alone and in isolation; the issue cannot be approached
piecemeal”. This leads us to ask ourselves about the meaning of
existence and its values at the basis of social life: “What is the
purpose of our life in this world? What is the goal of our work and
all our efforts? What need does the earth have of us?” “Unless we
struggle with these deeper issues – says the Pope – I do not
believe that our concern for ecology will produce significant
results”-.

The Encyclical takes its name from the
invocation of St. Francis, “Praise be to you, my Lord”, in his
Canticle of the Creatures. It reminds us that the earth, our common
home “is like a sister with whom we share our life and a beautiful
mother who opens her arms to embrace us”. We have forgotten that
“we ourselves are dust of the earth; our very bodies are made up of
her elements, we breathe her air and we receive life and refreshment
from her waters.”

Now, this earth, mistreated and abused,
is lamenting, and its groans join those of all the forsaken of the
world. Pope Francis invites us to listen to them, urging each and
every one – individuals, families, local communities, nations and
the international community – to an “ecological conversion”,
according to the expression of St. John Paul II. We are invited to
“change direction” by taking on the beauty and responsibility of
the task of “caring for our common home”. At the same time, Pope
Francis recognises that “there is a growing sensitivity to the
environment and the need to protect nature, along with a growing
concern, both genuine and distressing, for what is happening to our
planet”. A ray of hope flows through the entire Encyclical, which
gives a clear message of hope. “Humanity still has the ability to
work together in building our common home”. “Men and women are
still capable of intervening positively”. “All is not lost. Human
beings, while capable of the worst, are also capable of rising above
themselves, choosing again what is good, and making a new start”.

Pope Francis certainly addresses the
Catholic faithful, quoting St. John Paul II: “Christians in their
turn “realise that their responsibility within creation, and their
duty towards nature and the Creator, are an essential part of their
faith”“. Pope Francis proposes specially “to enter into
dialogue with all people about our common home”. The dialogue runs
throughout the text and in chapter 5 it becomes the instrument for
addressing and solving problems. From the beginning, Pope Francis
recalls that “other Churches and Christian communities – and
other religions as well – have also expressed deep concern and
offered valuable reflections” on the theme of ecology. Indeed, such
contributions expressly come in, starting with that of “the beloved
Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew”, extensively cited in numbers
8-9. On several occasions, then, the Pope thanks the protagonists of
this effort – individuals as well as associations and institutions.
He acknowledges that “the reflections of numerous scientists,
philosophers, theologians and civic groups, all […] have enriched
the Church’s thinking on these questions”. He invites everyone to
recognize “the rich contribution which the religions can make
towards an integral ecology and the full development of humanity”.

The itinerary of the Encyclical is
mapped out in n. 15 and divided into six chapters. It starts by
presenting the current situation based on the best scientific
findings available today, next, there is a review of the Bible and
Judeo-Christian tradition. The root of the problems in technocracy
and in an excessive self-centredness of the human being are analysed.
The Encyclical proposes an “integral ecology, which clearly
respects its human and social dimensions”, inextricably linked to
the environmental question. In this perspective, Pope Francis
proposes to initiate an honest dialogue at every level of social,
economic and political life, that builds transparent decision-making
processes, and recalls that no project can be effective if it is not
animated by a formed and responsible conscience. Ideas are put forth
to aid growth in this direction at the educational, spiritual,
ecclesial, political and theological levels. The text ends with two
prayers; one offered for sharing with everyone who believes in “God
who is the all-powerful Creator”, and the other to those who
profess faith in Jesus Christ, punctuated by the refrain “Praise be
to you!” which opens and closes the Encyclical.

Several main themes run through the
text that are addressed from a variety of different perspectives,
traversing and unifying the text: the intimate relationship between
the poor and the fragility of the planet, the conviction that
everything in the world is connected, the critique of new paradigms
and forms of power derived from technology, the call to seek other
ways of understanding the economy and progress, the value proper to
each creature, the human meaning of ecology, the need for forthright
and honest debate, the serious responsibility of international and
local policies, the throwaway culture and the proposal of a new
lifestyle.

Chapter 1 – WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR
COMMON HOME (Pollution and climate change; Pollution, refuse and the
culture of waste; Climate as a common good; The issue of water; Loss
of biodiversity; Decline in the quality of human life and the
breakdown of society; Global inequality; Weak responses; A variety of
opinions).

The chapter presents the most recent
scientific findings on the environment as a way to listen to the cry
of creation, “to become painfully aware, to dare to turn what is
happening to the world into our own personal suffering and thus to
discover what each of us can do about it”. It thus deals with
“several aspects of the present ecological crisis”.

Pollution and climate change: “Climate
change is a global problem with serious implications, environmental,
social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods; it
represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our
day”. If “the climate is a common good, belonging to all and
meant for all”, the greatest impact of this change falls on the
poorest, but “many of those who possess more resources and economic
or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the
problems or concealing their symptoms”. “Our lack of response to
these tragedies involving our brothers and sisters points to the loss
of that sense of responsibility for our fellow men and women upon
which all civil society is founded”.

The issue of water: the Pope clearly
states that “access to safe drinkable water is a basic and
universal human right, since it is essential to human survival and,
as such, is a condition for the exercise of other human rights”. To
deprive the poor of access to water means to deny “the right to a
life consistent with their inalienable dignity”.

Loss of biodiversity: “Each year sees
the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which we
will never know, which our children will never see, because they have
been lost forever”. They are not just any exploitable “resource”,
but have a value in and of themselves. In this perspective “we must
be grateful for the praiseworthy efforts being made by scientists and
engineers dedicated to finding solutions to man-made problems”, but
when human intervention is at the service of finance and consumerism,
“it is actually making our earth less rich and beautiful, ever more
limited and grey”.

Decline in the quality of human life
and the breakdown of society: in the framework of an ethics of
international relationships, the Encyclical indicates how a “true
“ecological debt” exists in the world, with the North in debt to
the South. In the face of climate change, there are “differentiated
responsibilities”, and those of the developed countries are
greater.

Aware of the profound differences over
these issues, Pope Francis shows himself to be deeply affected by the
“weak responses” in the face of the drama of many peoples and
populations. Even though there is no lack of positive examples, there
is “a complacency and a cheerful recklessness”. An adequate
culture is lacking as well as a willingness to change life style,
production and consumption, while there are efforts being made “to
establish a legal framework which can set clear boundaries and ensure
the protection of ecosystems”.

Chapter Two – THE GOSPEL OF CREATION
(The light offered by faith; The wisdom of the Biblical accounts; The
mystery of the universe; The message of each creature in the harmony
of creation; A universal communion; The common destination of goods;
The gaze of Jesus).

To face the problems illustrated in the
previous chapter, Pope Francis selects Biblical accounts, offering a
comprehensive view that comes from the Judeo-Christian tradition.
With this he articulates the “tremendous responsibility” of
humankind for creation, the intimate connection among all creatures
and the fact that “the natural environment is a collective good,
the patrimony of all humanity and the responsibility of everyone”.

In the Bible, “the God who liberates
and saves is the same God who created the universe, and these two
divine ways of acting are intimately and inseparably connected”.
The story of creation is central for reflecting on the relationship
between human beings and other creatures and how sin breaks the
equilibrium of all creation in its entirety: “These accounts
suggest that human life is grounded in three fundamental and closely
intertwined relationships: with God, with our neighbour and with the
earth itself. According to the Bible, these three vital relationships
have been broken, both outwardly and within us. This rupture is sin”.

For this, even if “we Christians have
at times incorrectly interpreted the Scriptures, nowadays we must
forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image
and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over
other creatures”. Human beings have the responsibility to ““till
and keep” the garden of the world”, knowing that “the ultimate
purpose of other creatures is not to be found in us. Rather, all
creatures are moving forward, with us and through us, towards a
common point of arrival, which is God”.

That the human being is not the master
of the universe “does not mean to put all living beings on the same
level and to deprive human beings of their unique worth and the
tremendous responsibility it entails. Nor does it imply a
divinisation of the earth which would prevent us from working on it
and protecting it in its fragility”. In this perspective, “every
act of cruelty towards any creature is “contrary to human dignity”.
However, “a sense of deep communion with the rest of nature cannot
be real if our hearts lack tenderness, compassion and concern for our
fellow human beings”. What is needed is the awareness of a
universal communion: “called into being by the one Father. All of
us are linked by unseen bonds and together form a kind of universal
family, a sublime communion which fills us with a sacred,
affectionate and humble respect”.

The chapter concludes with the heart of
Christian revelation: “The earthly Jesus” with “his tangible
and loving relationship with the world” is “risen and glorious,
and is present throughout creation by his universal Lordship”.

Chapter three – THE HUMAN ROOTS OF
THE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS (Technology: creativity and power; The
globalisation of the technocratic paradigm; The crisis and effects of
modern anthropocentrism; Practical relativism; The need to protect
employment; New biological technologies).

This chapter gives an analysis of the
current situation, “so as to consider not only its symptoms but
also its deepest causes”, in a dialogue with philosophy and the
human sciences.

Reflections on technology are an
initial focus of the chapter: the great contribution to the
improvement of living conditions is acknowledged with gratitude.
However it gives “those with the knowledge, and especially the
economic resources to use them, an impressive dominance over the
whole of humanity and the entire world”. It is precisely the
mentality of technocratic domination that leads to the destruction of
nature and the exploitation of people and the most vulnerable
populations. “The technocratic paradigm also tends to dominate
economics and political life”, keeping us from recognising that “by
itself the market cannot guarantee integral human development and
social inclusion”.

“Modernity has been marked by an
excessive anthropocentrism”: human beings no long recognise their
right place with respect to the world and take on a self-centred
position, focused exclusively on themselves and on their own power.
This results in a “use and throw away” logic that justifies every
type of waste, environmental or human, that treats both the other and
nature as simple objects and leads to a myriad of forms of
domination. It is this mentality that leads to exploiting children,
abandoning the elderly, forcing others into slavery and
over-evaluating the capacity of the market to regulate itself,
practising human trafficking, selling pelts of animals in danger of
extinction and of “blood diamonds”. It is the same mentality as
many mafias, of those involved in trafficking organs and drug
trafficking and of throwing away unborn babies because they do not
correspond to what the parents want.

In this light, the Encyclical addresses
two crucial problems of today’s world. Above all work: “any
approach to an integral ecology, which by definition does not exclude
human beings, needs to take account of the value of labour”,
because “to stop investing in people, in order to gain greater
short-term financial gain, is bad business for society”.

The second problem regards the
limitations of scientific progress, with clear reference to GMOs.
This is a “complex environmental issue”. Even though “in some
regions their use has brought about economic growth which has helped
to resolve problems, there remain a number of significant
difficulties which should not be underestimated”, starting from the
“productive land being concentrated in the hands of a few owners”.
Pope Francis thinks particularly of small producers and rural
workers, of biodiversity, and the network of ecosystems. Therefore “a
broad, responsible scientific and social debate needs to take place,
one capable of considering all the available information and of
calling things by their name” starting from “lines of
independent, interdisciplinary research”.

Chapter four – INTEGRAL ECOLOGY
(Environmental, economic and social ecology; Cultural ecology;
Ecology of daily life; The principle of the common good; Justice
between the generations).

The heart of what the Encyclical
proposes is integral ecology as a new paradigm of justice; an ecology
“which respects our unique place as human beings in this world and
our relationship to our surroundings”. In fact, “nature cannot be
regarded as something separate from ourselves or as a mere setting in
which we live”. This is true as we are involved in various fields:
in economy and politics, in different cultures particularly in those
most threatened, and even in every moment of our daily lives.

The integral perspective also brings
the ecology of institutions into play: “if everything is related,
then the health of a society’s institutions affects the environment
and the quality of human life. “Every violation of solidarity and
civic friendship harms the environment”.

With many concrete examples, Pope
Francis confirm his thinking that “the analysis of environmental
problems cannot be separated from the analysis of human, family,
work-related and urban contexts, and of how individuals relate to
themselves”. “We are not faced with two separate crises, one
environmental and the other social, but rather one complex crisis
which is both social and environmental”.

“Human ecology is inseparable from
the notion of the common good”, but is to be understood in a
concrete way. In today’s context, in which, “injustices abound
and growing numbers of people are deprived of basic human rights and
considered expendable”, committing oneself to the common good means
to make choices in solidarity based on “a preferential option for
the poorest of our brothers and sisters”. This is also the best way
to leave a sustainable world for future generations, not just by
proclaiming, but by committing to care for the poor of today, as
already emphasised by Benedict XVI: “In addition to a fairer sense
of inter-generational solidarity there is also an urgent moral need
for a renewed sense of intra-generational solidarity”.

Integral ecology also involves everyday
life. The Encyclical gives specific attention to the urban
environment. The human being has a great capacity for adaptation and
“an admirable creativity and generosity is shown by persons and
groups who respond to environmental limitations by alleviating the
adverse effects of their surroundings and learning to live
productively amid disorder and uncertainty”. Nevertheless,
authentic development presupposes an integral improvement in the
quality of human life: public space, housing, transport, etc.

Also “the acceptance of our bodies as
God’s gift is vital for welcoming and accepting the entire world as
a gift from the Father and our common home, whereas thinking that we
enjoy absolute power over our own bodies turns, often subtly, into
thinking that we enjoy absolute power over creation”.

Chapter five – LINES OF APPROACH AND
ACTION (Dialogue on the environment; In the international community;
Dialogue for new national and local policies; Dialogue and
transparency in decision-making; Politics and economy in dialogue for
human fulfilment; Religions in dialogue with science).

This chapter addresses the question of
what we can and must do. Analyses are not enough: we need proposals
“for dialogue and action which would involve each of us
individually no less than international policy”. They will “help
us to escape the spiral of self-destruction which currently engulfs
us”. For Pope Francis it is imperative that the developing real
approaches is not done in an ideological, superficial or reductionist
way. For this, dialogue is essential, a term present in the title of
every section of this chapter. “There are certain environmental
issues where it is not easy to achieve a broad consensus. […] the
Church does not presume to settle scientific questions or to replace
politics. But I want to encourage an honest and open debate, so that
particular interests or ideologies will not prejudice the common
good”.

On this basis, Pope Francis is not
afraid to judge international dynamics severely: “Recent World
Summits on the environment have failed to live up to expectations
because, due to lack of political will, they were unable to reach
truly meaningful and effective global agreements on the environment”.
And he asks “What would induce anyone, at this stage, to hold on to
power only to be remembered for their inability to take action when
it was urgent and necessary to do so?”. Instead, what is needed, as
the Popes have repeated several times, starting with Pacem in terris,
are forms and instruments for global governance: “an agreement on
systems of governance for the whole range of the so-called “global
commons”“, seeing that “environmental protection cannot be
assured solely on the basis of financial calculations of costs and
benefits. The environment is one of those goods that cannot be
adequately safeguarded or promoted by market forces” (190,
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church).

In this fifth chapter, Pope Francis
insists on development of honest and transparent decision-making
processes, in order to “discern” which policies and business
initiatives can bring about “genuine integral development”. In
particular, a proper environmental impact study of new “business
ventures and projects demands transparent political processes
involving a free exchange of views. On the other hand, the forms of
corruption which conceal the actual environmental impact of a given
project in exchange for favours usually produce specious agreements
which fail to inform adequately and do not allow for full debate”.

The most significant appeal is
addressed to those who hold political office, so that they avoid “a
mentality of “efficiency” and “immediacy” that is so
prevalent today: “but if they are courageous, they will attest to
their God-given dignity and leave behind a testimony of selfless
responsibility”.

Chapter six – ECOLOGICAL EDUCATION
AND SPIRITUALITY (Towards a new lifestyle; Educating for the covenant
between humanity and the environment; Ecological conversion; Joy and
peace; Civic and political love; Sacramental signs and the
celebration of rest; The trinity and relationships between creatures;
Queen of all creation; Beyond the sun).

The final chapter invites everyone to
the heart of ecological conversion. The roots of the cultural crisis
are deep, and it is not easy to reshape habits and behaviour.
Education and training are the key challenges: “change is
impossible without motivation and a process of education” (15). All
educational sectors are involved, primarily “at school, in
families, in the media, in catechesis and elsewhere”.

The starting point is “to aim for a
new lifestyle”, which also opens the possibility of “bringing
healthy pressure to bear on those who wield political, economic and
social power”. This is what happens when consumer choices are able
to “change the way businesses operate, forcing them to consider
their environmental footprint and their patterns of production”.

The importance of environmental
education cannot be underestimated. It is able to affect actions and
daily habits, the reduction of water consumption, the sorting of
waste and even “turning off unnecessary lights”: “An integral
ecology is also made up of simple daily gestures which break with the
logic of violence, exploitation and selfishness”. Everything will
be easier starting with a contemplative outlook that comes from
faith: “as believers, we do not look at the world from without but
from within, conscious of the bonds with which the Father has linked
us with all beings. By developing our individual, God-given
capacities, an ecological conversion can inspire us to greater
creativity and enthusiasm”.

As proposed in Evangelii Gaudium:
“sobriety, when lived freely and consciously, is liberating”,
just as “happiness means knowing how to limit some needs which only
diminish us, and being open to the many different possibilities which
life can offer”. In this way “we must regain the conviction that
we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others
and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it”.

The saints accompany us on this
journey. St. Francis, cited several times, is “the example par
excellence of care for the vulnerable and of an integral ecology
lived out joyfully and authentically”. He is the model of “the
inseparable bond between concern for nature, justice for the poor,
commitment to society, and interior peace”. The Encyclical also
mentions St. Benedict, St. Teresa di Lisieux and Blessed Charles de
Foucauld.

After Laudato si’, the regular
practice of an examination of conscience, the means that the Church
has always recommended to orient one’s life in light of the
relationship with the Lord, should include a new dimension,
considering not only how one has lived communion with God, with
others and with oneself, but also with all creatures and with nature.

Vatican City, 18 June 2015 (VIS) –
This morning in the New Synod Hall Cardinal Peter Kodwo Appiah
Turkson, president of the Pontifical Council “Justice and Peace”,
introduced Pope Francis' Encyclical “Laudato si'”, on care for
our common home.

The cardinal welcomed the presenters of
the document: the Metropolitan of Pergamon, John Zizioulas,
representing the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Orthodox Church, who
spoke on theology and spirituality, the opening and closing themes of
the encyclical; Professor John Schellnhuber, founder and director of
the Institute for Climate Impact in Potsdam, Federal Republic of
Germany, representing the field of natural sciences, with which the
encyclical enters into profound dialogue, and who was recently
appointed as an ordinary member of the Pontifical Academy of the
Sciences; Carolyn Woo, president of Catholic Relief Services and
former dean of the Mendoza College of Business of the University of
Notre Dame, U.S.A., representing the sectors of economy, finance,
trade and commerce, whose responses to the great environmental
challenges are crucial; and Valeria Martano, a teacher for 20 years
in the outskirts of Rome and witness to human and environmental
degradation, as well as to some examples of “best practice”, a
sign of hope.

The speakers demonstrated that the
Encyclical, from the very beginning, seeks to establish a dialogue
with all, both individuals as well as the organisations and
institutions that share the same concerns as the Pope, approached
from different perspectives, in a global situation that renders them
increasingly intertwined and complementary. “This type of dialogue
was also employed as the method of preparation that the Holy Father
embraced in the writing of the Encyclical”, said Cardinal Turkson.
“He relied on a wide range of contributions. Some, in particular
those from many Episcopal Conferences from all the continents, are
mentioned. ... Others who participated in the various phases of this
work … remain unnamed. The Lord knows well how to reward their
generosity and dedication”.

The Encyclical takes its name from the
invocation of St Francis of Assisi: “Laudato si’ mi’ Signore”
“Praise be to you, my Lord”. “The reference to St. Francis also
indicates the attitude upon which the entire encyclical is based,
that of prayerful contemplation, which invites us to look towards the
'poor one of Assisi” as a source of inspiration” and as the
quintessential example of “care for the vulnerable and of an
integral ecology lived out joyfully and authentically”.

Metropolitan John Zizioulas of Pergamon
devoted a large part of his intervention to the ecumenism in “Laudato
si'”, and mentioned that in 1989 the Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios
published an encyclical addressed to all Christians and persons of
good will warning of the seriousness of the ecological problem and
its theological and spiritual implications, and in the same year he
proposed the dedication of 1 September every year to prayer for the
environment. This date, according to the Orthodox calendar, is the
first day of the ecclesiastical year and now devoted to the
environment. The Metropolitan proposed the adoption by all Christians
of this day for prayer for the environment.

“I believe that the significance of
the papal Encyclical Laudato si' is not limited to the subject of
ecology as such. I see in it an important ecumenical dimension in
that it brings the divided Christians before a common task which they
must face together. We live at a time when fundamental existential
problems overwhelm our traditional divisions and relativise them
almost to the point of extinction. Look, for example, at what is
happening today in the Middle East: do those who persecute the
Christians ask them to which Church or Confession they belong?
Christian unity in such cases is de facto realised by persecution and
blood – an ecumenism of martyrdom”.

“The threat posed to us by the
ecological crisis similarly bypasses or transcends our traditional
divisions. The danger facing our common home, the planet on which we
live, is described in the Encyclical in a way leaving no doubt about
the existential risk we are confronted with. This risk is common to
all of us regardless of our ecclesiastical or confessional
identities. Equally common must be our effort to prevent the
catastrophic consequences of the present situation. Pope Francis'
Encyclical is a call to unity – unity in prayer for the
environment, in the same Gospel of Creation, in the conversion of our
hearts and our lifestyles to respect and love everyone and everything
given to us by God”.

Professor John Schellnhuber went on to
note that, from a technological perspective, the deployment of clean
energy for all is feasible and is, in fact, “available in
abundance. All we have to do is develop the means to properly harvest
it and responsibly manage our consumption. While we have been working
decade after decade on developing an incredibly expensive fusion
reactor, we are already blessed with one that works perfectly well
and is free to all of us: the Sun. Photovoltaics, wind and energy
from biomass are ultimately all powered by sunlight. These new
technologies could unfold potential in poor countries where no grid
exists to distribute electricity produced by centralised power plants
and where settlements may be too distantly located from one another
to make such as system feasible. Just like the evolving use of mobile
phones without the previous establishment of landlines, developing
countries could leapfrog the fossil episode and enter the age of
decentralised renewable energy production without detour”.

“The care for our planet therefore
does not have to evolve into a tragedy of the commons. It may well
turn into a story of great transformation in which the opportunity
was seized to overcome profound inequalities. These disparities arose
from the geological coincidence of regional fossil fuel distribution
controlled by the few and the concomitant exploitation. Today, the
implications of our actions and the pathways are clear. It is solely
a question of what future we choose to believe in and to pursue”.

Carolyn Woo, the president of Catholic
Relief Services and former dean of the Mendoza College of Business of
the University of Notre Dame, U.S.A., as an expert in economics and
finance, affirmed that investing in sustainability is “another
win-win opportunity for business”, given that “numerous studies
have provided estimates of astronomical costs associated with coastal
disasters as water levels rise, drought and storms that devastate
agricultural production, or loss in productivity due to growing days
of extreme heat and health crises due to pollution. … Business can
play a role to assist customers to become responsible consumers.
Design and production that minimises waste by utilising renewable
energy sources, improving efficiencies, enabling recycling,
reclamation and re-use provides new opportunities for businesses as
these enable consumers to do their part”.

“This Encyclical certainly affirms
the important role that business will need to play, but Pope Francis
is clear that we need partnerships between public and private sectors
– as he puts it, 'politics and economics in dialogue for human
fulfilment'. Since both public and private sectors have the same
goal, and are integrated into the same interconnected web of life,
they need to work together in harmony. Sometimes that means business
being more accepting of stronger forms of regulation, especially in
the financial sector. It also means business getting fully on board
with the new Sustainable Development Goals and the need to take
action to combat climate change. At the end of the day, business is a
human enterprise and must strive for true human development and the
common good”.

Finally, the teacher Valeria Martano
talked about urban ecology, endangered by pollution, inadequate
services and generalised individualism, as a challenge for
Christians. The quality of life in the suburbs is poor, she
emphasised: “there is a build-up of rage and a sense of exclusion.
Too many people are denied the dignity of a house, such as the Roma
community, and often we witness the destruction of precarious
dwellings without the offer of an alternative. The elderly are
'expelled' from the social fabric and located in peripheral
institutions. … We encounter violence in some quarters. But we can
help live better if we reject this resignation to individualism. …
For years, with the Sant'Egidio Community, we have worked to save
spaces from pollution. … Starting with the weakest – children,
the elderly, the disabled – we reconstruct a human fabric. …
Around the weak, it is possible to renew the face of the suburbs,
discovering energies that renew human ecology”.

“The Encyclical invites us to put
into practice the common good”, she concluded. “The city and the
environment are our common home. We often live according to human
itineraries: fragmented and contradictory. Each person tries to save
himself, in his own corner. Everyone follows his own interest. But
there is a 'community salvation' that starts from the inclusion of
the weak, a valuable resource for an integral ecology”.